Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    June 15, 2013 2:00am-2:31am PDT

2:00 am
>> the time is 5:35 p.m. and at this time i would like to ask all members of the public to turn off all cell phones and pagers, please sign in with the
2:01 am
front table if you would like to be added to our mailing list. >> public comment will be taken on each item and speaker cards are available at the table. >> we would like to thank sfgov tv and the services for the constant support. and item one is called to order and roll call. >> commissioner adams? >> here. >> dooley. >> here. >> dwight. >> here. >> o'brien. >> absent. >> ortiz-cartagena. >> absent. >> white? >> here. >> yee riley. >> here. >> we have a quorum. >> commissioners item two, the presentation of the small business commission certificate of honor recognizing a local small business as part of the sbc small business recognition program and due to scheduling issues i would like to ask that we continue this item to the call of the chair, to a future commission meeting.
2:02 am
>> yes. i move that we continue this item until our next meeting. and what date is that on? >> our next meeting is june 24th. >> and that was the 2 4g9 >> okay. >> second. >> and i don't believe that we need action for this week. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> and just for the record, commissioner o'brien... (inaudible). >> next item. >> commissioners you are now on item three which is general public comment, this allows the members of the public to comment generally on matters within the commission's purview and suggests new agenda items for the commission's future consideration and this is a discussion item. >> do we have any general members of the public that would like to make a comment and any items pertaining to small business that is not on
2:03 am
today's agenda? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. next item? >> commissioners, this brings you to the main agenda, the first item is the item number four, discussion and possible action to make recommendations to the board of supervisors on the board of supervisor's file number 1 30372 planning code zoning map third street formula retail restricted use district. this is an ordinance amending the planning code to create the third street formula retail restricted use district. in your binder is the file number, along with the legislative digest, and there is a presentation by (inaudible) legislative aid to cohen. >> and also with the briefing sheet is a map that shows the zoning districts that are affected as well. >> and this is a discussion and
2:04 am
action item. >> welcome andrea. >> hi, commissioners good to see some of you again and thanks for having us at the legislative committee a couple of weeks ago, i work for supervisor cohen and as you have probably hrd read in your packets this legislation does a couple of things, it establishes a new formula retail use district on the southern portion of williams and it requires a new conditional authorization for any new formula retail establishments that want to locate in this area as well as a change from one of the existing retail use to a new formula retail use and i think that it is important to provide the commission with a little bit of a context of why the supervisor introduced this legislation, and the zoning for this particular area is relatively complicated as you can see on the map. it is actually not zoned commercial. you would think that it would be. but it is actually a mix of pdr and m1 zoning, it is more a vestage of the more and older
2:05 am
nature of the southern portion of third street and because it is not zoned in the c, district there are no formula restrictions that would currently apply today. this portion of third street also does have a couple of existing formula retail uses namely a walgreens and a mcdonalds and i also think that in terms of the neighborhood context this is not a neighborhood that has been resistant necessarily to formula retail and there are hundreds of thousands of square foot of formula retail uses that are entitled through the neighborhood through the development projects that are approved by the city and we introduced this legislation in response to a number of concerns that we heard from the neighborhood. as many of you know, or have not already experienced, bay view is changing. much for the better. the city has made an extreme investment in the commercial corridor and thanks to the help of both of mer chent's
2:06 am
organization we are seeing activity. >> it has taught us that projects are improved when the neighborhood has an opportunity to be involved. that really the point of this legislation, if there is going to be a new formula retail use that comes through and this city and the organization has spent a significant amount to help the local merchants we want to make sure that they are going to compliment the neighborhood and going to work with our residents and with our city family to make sure that we strike the right balance through form formula retail and i am happy to answer your questions that you may have and thanks a again for your time. >> commissioner cartagena? >> i have questions. >> was there a desire from the
2:07 am
neighborhood that drove supervisor cohen to come up with this? >> it was a couple of things. we get a lot questions all of the time about zoning, along the corridor and this particular area of third street and we realized that if a formula came forward today they would have no community processes associated with it because there is no formula retail controls that apply and so rather than say that we want no formula retail in the area ever, we recognize i think that is what we really want is some level of conditional use process so that they would have the opportunity to enter face with any potential new applicant and we did have that experience with fresh and easy because they went through a planned unit development approval process for the third street block and so the community has spent a lot of time around limiting over the counter or local sales and
2:08 am
local hire and a lot of things that help to make those businesses a good part of the neighborhood and we did not want to see something fall through the cracks without having a neighborhood process and we did hear from a couple of the neighbors that this was an issue and we also did work with the mayor's office of workforce development on it as well. and they are putting a huge investment into the third street corridor. >> thank you. >> commissioner dwight? >> where is fresh and easy going in? >> it is already at the 300 and third. in this area. >> okay, all right. >> and so, just to confirm, this just sets up a continual use process whereby the opportunity gets vetted. >> yeah. >> it does not prevent it? >> it is not a formula retail band. >> it leaves in place the zoning for pdr. >> it does. we did not necessarily want to rezone the whole area recognizing that there are some
2:09 am
pdr parcels that are more appropriate to stay. >> we are seeing in the dog patch and some of the pdr uses included retail front end and more and more as i stated in my article and in the magazine, the retail and manufacturing assured us and so having that manufacturing going on in the back of the building adds to the excitement on the front end and so the more that it represents the local goods and so we are seeing a need for more space. as i see it so that dog patch is filled up and the next logical place. >> and hopefully they will trickle down south a little bit. >> and this weekend during our sunday streets i had an opportunity to ride from dog patch to the bay view opera house and it is good to see the pizza which is doing a place and there is activation which is looking promising. >> and it is great to see that development in that neighborhood. >> commissioner riley? >> yes, you mentioned there is
2:10 am
a mcdonalds and a walgreens in the area right now. and they did not go through the conditional use process. >> not to my knowledge. >> how do the neighbors feel about that? do they feel they take away the business from others? or noisy traffic and all of that? >> i mean, they have been there a while. maybe even (inaudible) could advise a little more from the bay view merchant's association, the walgreens has gone through a lot of transitions and made a lot of improvements to that that made it i think in terms of fresh food and some other options that were available to the community. and so, you know it is all about finding the right balance and i don't think that people look at the walgreens and mcdonalds and say that these are the worst business to have on third street, but i also think that you would not want to see that to be proliferated up and down the corridor. >> we hear a mix and so it is not a problem at this time.
2:11 am
>> yeah. i have not heard a specific complaint about the mcdonalds or the walgreens. >> thank you. >> commissioner dooley? >> i think that always a good idea as especially in this neighborhood as the beginning to develop to have that extra step taken, you know, obviously we would like to encourage more independence. and if there is more process for review, you know, a lot of formula retail could liferate so it is good for the neighborhood to decide what they do and don't want. >> great. >> any other commissioner comments? >> public comment? >> do we have any members of the public that would like to make any comments on the item number four? >> good afternoon, commissioners. >> before you start, public comment will be limited to i
2:12 am
believe three minutes. >> yeah. >> and there will be a time and her if i know your name and state it for the record. >> okay. >> my name is lasean walker sxim the president of the bay view merchant's association. and so, i would like to make some comments about this item. commissioner riley asked about what the community feels about the form law retail like mcdonalds and walgreens. i think that one of the things that is really quite significant about us, while i am the president of the bay view merchant's association, we are also a member of the council of district merchants while we talk about form law retail coming into all commercial corridors, third street has a particular issue that on the one hand in general we advocate for small business, local business. there are sort of needs, on the third street corridor that the other commercial partners don't have. >> there say duality about the formula around our neighborhood.
2:13 am
>> walgreens has joined the bay view merchant's association and have made a significant effort to become a real partner with activities and engagement with local business around healthy food and health screenings and different things that they have done and so i don't want to talk about walgreens and they are trying to improve themselves in terms of neighbors. when we talk about formula retail commissioner dooley, i appreciate you talking about the community being able to be involved. often what happens in that south east sector on third street, things happen to us not with us and so having that opportunity to participate with any applicant, and i think is a very significant thing and not only to vet with it the merchants but also with the council of district merchants because we do advocate for small business and we see the needs for the services in that corridor. and does that sort of answer your question about that? >> yes.
2:14 am
>> thank you. >> and then i just wanted to also say that in response to andrea's comments that there has been no process in the past. i think that when we talk about though, any conditional use, as i look through the proposal, i don't see any restrictions around hiring, so when she gave me the example of fresh and easy, we are talking about a conditional use that would include things like size and scope and product mix and whether it fits in the neighborhood and things like that, but what i don't see is one of those requirements being, who they hire. and i think that for if we look at that particular neighborhood, that matters. and so i would like to see that added as one of the requirements in terms of who is hired to work not just in the store but also the vendors and
2:15 am
the professional services that go along with that business. >> thank you. >> thank you, very much. >> any other members of the public? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner dwight? >> i am just curious to your last point whether we have any precedents in any of other areas that we have done this sort of work around hiring and that sort of thing? >> because there may be legal implications. >> so it is a good question, typically we negotiate them as part of a specific condition of approval, which is one potential option and a conditional use process and i would need to conduct with our city attorney as to what type of language that we can add. and each if there is some policy objective language that we can add i think that it is an important indication that we give that this is a part of the city where if you are going to have formula retail uses we want to make sure that you are committed to local hire. >> i will just have to check. >> i think that we can include
2:16 am
and anything that whatever we conclude is that we recommend that the research be done on that by the office and not going to hold up the recommendation or not. and i think that is a great point, so thank you for that. >> commissioner o'brien? >> yeah, i would like to make a motion to support this. i think that it is rather timely myself, i am familiar with the bay view area and i have some properties out there and i have had for many, many years. and to commissioner dooley's point, i think that it would be very nice and i think that the bay view is an exciting area of the city right now and i think that it is going to see more transition and relative terms and maybe all of the parts of the city because it has got all of this massive potential because it has been neglected for so long and i am excited about that and the fact that as commissioner dooley said that if that is what starts to happen, then, i think that it is pretty exciting that we
2:17 am
could have local neighborhood input involved in designing that neighborhood, that reflects the desires and wishes of the residents of the neighborhood. and so i would like to make a motion to support this as presented by supervisor cohen. >> and adding that we recommend to the office that they look into this potential modification. >> yes. >> and i just like to say that like i am very happy on this subject that i feel that we are getting in front of the issue instead of behind the issue once the development starts and that. >> and so i think that this is a very good piece of legislation, especially for this part of the city and i am glad that we are talking about this now instead of five years down the line when there will be a lot of items coming up and i do want to congratulate you on the bay view merchants because you guys are a very active merchant group and i really appreciate everything
2:18 am
that your organization is doing down there and you are doing a great job. >> mostly we deserve the right to a formula retail option to give them, you know, they are not a blanket restriction and i am not anti-formula hawk and i believe in a balance and i think that they can bring something to a neighborhood and i know that wal greens and i think that is helpful for that particular corner that they are on and it is definitely something that the neighborhood deserves and i am happy to be a part of it. >> second. >> do you want to do a roll call, chris? >> commissioners? regarding file number 1 30372, i have a motion by o'brien support as drafted request that the supervisor look into the localing hiring provision and restricted use district but not make it a condition of approval.
2:19 am
is that reflect your motion? >> yes. >> and i have that second by commissioner dooley on the roll call, mr. president? >> yes. >> president adams? >> yes. >> commissioner dooley? >> yes. >> commissioner dwight. >> yes. >> commissioner o'brien. >> yes. >> commissioner ortiz-cartagena. >> yes. >> xhixer white. >> yes. >> commissioner riley. >> yes. >> that passes. >> thanks. >> next item. >> commissioners this places you on item number five, discussion and possible action to make recommendations to the board of supervisors on board of supervisors file no 130402, health, business, and tax regulations codes, safe body art. this is an ordinance amending the health code by repealing the sections relating to tattooing and adding article 40 to require body art
2:20 am
practitioners to register with the department of public health and to require permanent and temporary body art facilities to obtain permits with dph, it includes the file number sxai digest and we have a presentation by richard lee, the department of public health and this say discussion and a possible action item. >> good afternoon, commissioners. >> richard lee, the health department. the health department and the city of san francisco is one of the few sections in california that actually inspected and permitted body art, tattoo, parlors for many years. and finally, in 2011, there was actually 8300 passed sponsored by a woman fiona mah and it took several times before they actually got signed by the
2:21 am
governor and back then governor schwarzenegger vetoed it twice and it took governor brown when he got elected that is when it passed and he signed it. >> right now there are state wide regulations for body art facilities and now we are this ordinance basically is adopting those regulations. we are not making them any tougher, or just adopting them like everyone else in california. >> before, what we would do is that we would have the health code and the article five and we would inspect those facilities, and we just look for things for the sanitation, and we developed some or some regulations but we did not really have the teeth and the authority to do the things that this law has now. and so did a lot of changes smf the things that is what is going to happen now. is there is going to be regulations on blood board
2:22 am
training for all of the practitioners so that they know what to do in case they get orders and get exposed to blood. there is going to be requirements for better sanitation, and things like sterilization and we have to make sure that the things like the auto claves are working properly and there is going to be questionnaires for all of the clients and then they have to maintain those records. also, now, we want to make sure that there is a means able to contact those that establishments in case something happened with the equipment. and so, some other things that are happening is before we were not regulated permanent cosmetics and now it is going to be included in the establishments that we can regulate and what we are going
2:23 am
to be doing is registering ear piercing facilities and so all of the ear piercing facilities at malls wither going to be at least getting documentation on them so that we can contact them if we have something else that happens. >> and okay, in terms of the fees, the establishment fees that we have been charging will not change, this does not change that at all. but it will add new fees and it will increase the fees for the practitioners and it will go from $25 a year which was what the limit that was set by the state for many years and now we are imposing $175 a year fee for the practitioners. also, we are going to add fees for things like temporary events, and also, for i got, mobile food, in case they are actually mobile, i mean, mobile body art facilities.
2:24 am
we don't expect that, but there may be some. and then we will have a fee to charge those. >> so, in general, that is it for me right now. >> okay. any questions. >> commissioner comments? >> commissioner white? >> i noticed that you are proposing a $800 fee and $186 hourly fee. could you tell me why that was changed or proposed and how many hours that you will expect to take to expect. >> that is the plan check. for instance let's say that there is a new facility that wants to be perm mitted we actually have the inspector walsh look at the plans to make sure that they have all of the equipment and it is a structural ability and to be able to handle a body art facility. so things like if they have what type of hand washing and
2:25 am
toilet and look at their positions under their work stations. and look at the general sanitation and see if they can actually do sterilizing and sanitizing. >> he charges $186 to look at that type of facility and approve it before it gets approved. >> what were you doing before? >> what were we doing? >> yes, we were doing this, this is making it more official. >> we always charge, we just had a plan check fee. which is right now, what we are charging the $186 for like food or for mobile food or for cost connections or swimming pools so this is the same as what we are charging any other type of facility. >> is that usually an hour to do. >> what we are charging is $800 and depending on the number of hours that is takes we subtract it off the $800 and many times it will take four hours and that is $800 it is going to be.
2:26 am
>> okay. >> ed walsh with the health department, regarding your question, commissionerer white, we collected a $800 deputy and that is based on a $186 an hour, and times the union plans and going out on the construction through the materials that are going to be used for the rest room or for the bio room, for the schedule what kind of auto clave and the finishes on the walls and in the rest room and in the bio room and the requirements that it requires now for us to check, as part of the plans. and before we could issue the building permit. and a sign-off on the building permit. and so all of that $186 an hour, that is tabulated against that $800. and if there is any money left
2:27 am
over from the job is completed. >> we will refund the money. >> okay. it is more or less a deposit. >> it is based on $186 an hour. >> so the $800 would be the deposit and then $186 per hour, is... >> times the plans and going out and like reviewing the construction, or with the health code >> okay. >> commissioner dwight? >> how many facilities per year, this is for new facilities or major remodels. >> that is where the minor remodel or reconstruction. >> four or five a year. >> not a big number. >> no it is not. >> and the population of existing establishments? >> approximately 60 licensed facilities. >> okay. >> this just includes tattooing and body piercing and there are
2:28 am
some permanent cosmetics too. >> do you have an idea of how many piercing will be established as you include your piercing? >> right now, we think that there is, we are looking at maybe, 40, 40 places and we will give you an out come and these are the places that will register with us and they will not be inspected on a routine basis and these are the folks that use the gun. >> yeah. >> i have a daughter, i have the ear infection things. >> there is less requirements for that. >> yeah. >> there should be more but there are less. >> yeah. >> commissioner o'brien? >> i am just curious to know, how you come up with the figure for $175 for the new fee? >> yeah. >> we feel that is how much time it will take in terms of our staffing to, well, maybe i will explain the whole and i
2:29 am
will explain the budget to you. >> i don't want to suck up a lot of time for that, but, maybe a better way to go for my reaction for that is i am always adverse to huge hikes, you know, there are people that are running business, now, and they have been for some time and they are used to the 25 dollar fee and suddenly, they see, 100, what? >> 175 dollar jump or 175 percent jump in that. >> and i am always adverse to that sort of change in people's minds no matter how small the figure is because i would rather they be done progressively over a number of years. >> this is a 600 percent increase. >> yes. >> that is a lot. >> $25, that was something that was imposed like ten or 15 years ago. >> that did not cover the cost that we have to do in terms of
2:30 am
dealing with, you mean, having to register and actually you know, dealing with the practitioners when we go to the site. we have to make sure that they have a license and also that they have the training and a lot of times we have to observe them when they are doing their work to make sure that they are doing things properly. >> i don't think that the point is to quarrel whether it is right or now. but the advice to you all as you do your out reach before the people get this bill in the mail that you think about how you explain this to them that one, this is a fee that has gone unchanged and unchecked for a long time and just the inflation adjustment should be high and there is more that require more time. this is a legitimate cost of doing business rather than something that you pulled it out of the air